26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Preparedness of countries to face covid-19 pandemic crisis: Strategic positioning and underlying structural factors to support strategies of prevention of pandemic threats

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to generate a constant pandemic threat with new mutations of the viral agent that create socioeconomic issues. One of the fundamental problems is the evaluation of the preparedness of countries to cope with COVID-19 pandemic crisis to detect factors associated with the reduction of infectious disease and rollout of vaccinations in society. The study here confronts this problem by developing two basic indexes, which measure the performance to face pandemic threats by countries. In particular, the Index r (as resilience) detects which countries have had the best performance to reduce the negative impact of mortality related to COVID-19 pandemic and the Index p (as preparedness and prevention) assesses best-performer countries to support COVID-19 vaccinations to constrain future pandemic threats and support the recovery of socioeconomic systems. Index of resilience is a composite measure based on three indicators, given by average mortality, hospital occupancy and Intensive Care Units occupancy per 100 000 people, producing an overall score; Index of prevention is also a composite measure of two indicators related COVID-19 vaccinations (doses of vaccines administrated and total vaccinates per 100 000 people), producing an overall score. The application of these indexes on a case study of European countries, having a homogenous socioeconomic area, shows strategic positioning of countries to cope with a major pandemic threat. Findings reveal that all countries have some weaknesses and no country has a high preparedness to cope with a major epidemic or pandemic. Moreover, results suggest that best-performer countries to cope with COVID-19 pandemic crisis have a smaller size of population and better public governance, associated with high expenditures in health system. These indexes can help policymakers for designing strategies to improve preparedness to face future pandemic threats.

          Related collections

          Most cited references72

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mobility network models of COVID-19 explain inequities and inform reopening

          The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic markedly changed human mobility patterns, necessitating epidemiological models that can capture the effects of these changes in mobility on the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)1. Here we introduce a metapopulation susceptible-exposed-infectious-removed (SEIR) model that integrates fine-grained, dynamic mobility networks to simulate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in ten of the largest US metropolitan areas. Our mobility networks are derived from mobile phone data and map the hourly movements of 98 million people from neighbourhoods (or census block groups) to points of interest such as restaurants and religious establishments, connecting 56,945 census block groups to 552,758 points of interest with 5.4 billion hourly edges. We show that by integrating these networks, a relatively simple SEIR model can accurately fit the real case trajectory, despite substantial changes in the behaviour of the population over time. Our model predicts that a small minority of 'superspreader' points of interest account for a large majority of the infections, and that restricting the maximum occupancy at each point of interest is more effective than uniformly reducing mobility. Our model also correctly predicts higher infection rates among disadvantaged racial and socioeconomic groups2-8 solely as the result of differences in mobility: we find that disadvantaged groups have not been able to reduce their mobility as sharply, and that the points of interest that they visit are more crowded and are therefore associated with higher risk. By capturing who is infected at which locations, our model supports detailed analyses that can inform more-effective and equitable policy responses to COVID-19.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom

            Identifying and understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy within distinct populations may aid future public health messaging. Using nationally representative data from the general adult populations of Ireland (N = 1041) and the United Kingdom (UK; N = 2025), we found that vaccine hesitancy/resistance was evident for 35% and 31% of these populations respectively. Vaccine hesitant/resistant respondents in Ireland and the UK differed on a number of sociodemographic and health-related variables but were similar across a broad array of psychological constructs. In both populations, those resistant to a COVID-19 vaccine were less likely to obtain information about the pandemic from traditional and authoritative sources and had similar levels of mistrust in these sources compared to vaccine accepting respondents. Given the geographical proximity and socio-economic similarity of the populations studied, it is not possible to generalize findings to other populations, however, the methodology employed here may be useful to those wishing to understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy elsewhere.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France: a survey experiment based on vaccine characteristics

              Background Opinion polls on vaccination intentions suggest that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide; however, the usefulness of opinion polls to prepare mass vaccination campaigns for specific new vaccines and to estimate acceptance in a country's population is limited. We therefore aimed to assess the effects of vaccine characteristics, information on herd immunity, and general practitioner (GP) recommendation on vaccine hesitancy in a representative working-age population in France. Methods In this survey experiment, adults aged 18–64 years residing in France, with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, were randomly selected from an online survey research panel in July, 2020, stratified by gender, age, education, household size, and region and area of residence to be representative of the French population. Participants completed an online questionnaire on their background and vaccination behaviour-related variables (including past vaccine compliance, risk factors for severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 perceptions and experience), and were then randomly assigned according to a full factorial design to one of three groups to receive differing information on herd immunity (>50% of adults aged 18–64 years must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; >50% of adults must be immunised [either by vaccination or infection]; or no information on herd immunity) and to one of two groups regarding GP recommendation of vaccination (GP recommends vaccination or expresses no opinion). Participants then completed a series of eight discrete choice tasks designed to assess vaccine acceptance or refusal based on hypothetical vaccine characteristics (efficacy [50%, 80%, 90%, or 100%], risk of serious side-effects [1 in 10 000 or 1 in 100 000], location of manufacture [EU, USA, or China], and place of administration [GP practice, local pharmacy, or mass vaccination centre]). Responses were analysed with a two-part model to disentangle outright vaccine refusal (irrespective of vaccine characteristics, defined as opting for no vaccination in all eight tasks) from vaccine hesitancy (acceptance depending on vaccine characteristics). Findings Survey responses were collected from 1942 working-age adults, of whom 560 (28·8%) opted for no vaccination in all eight tasks (outright vaccine refusal) and 1382 (71·2%) did not. In our model, outright vaccine refusal and vaccine hesitancy were both significantly associated with female gender, age (with an inverted U-shaped relationship), lower educational level, poor compliance with recommended vaccinations in the past, and no report of specified chronic conditions (ie, no hypertension [for vaccine hesitancy] or no chronic conditions other than hypertension [for outright vaccine refusal]). Outright vaccine refusal was also associated with a lower perceived severity of COVID-19, whereas vaccine hesitancy was lower when herd immunity benefits were communicated and in working versus non-working individuals, and those with experience of COVID-19 (had symptoms or knew someone with COVID-19). For a mass vaccination campaign involving mass vaccination centres and communication of herd immunity benefits, our model predicted outright vaccine refusal in 29·4% (95% CI 28·6–30·2) of the French working-age population. Predicted hesitancy was highest for vaccines manufactured in China with 50% efficacy and a 1 in 10 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 27·4% [26·8–28·0]), and lowest for a vaccine manufactured in the EU with 90% efficacy and a 1 in 100 000 risk of serious side-effects (vaccine acceptance 61·3% [60·5–62·1]). Interpretation COVID-19 vaccine acceptance depends on the characteristics of new vaccines and the national vaccination strategy, among various other factors, in the working-age population in France. Funding French Public Health Agency (Santé Publique France).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Res
                Environ Res
                Environmental Research
                Published by Elsevier Inc.
                0013-9351
                1096-0953
                16 July 2021
                16 July 2021
                : 111678
                Affiliations
                [1]CNR -- National Research Council of ITALY, Collegio Carlo Alberto, Via Real Collegio, 30-10024, Moncalieri, Torino, Italy
                Article
                S0013-9351(21)00972-5 111678
                10.1016/j.envres.2021.111678
                8284056
                34280421
                6493c02d-5838-4e77-968d-9eee094bc65b
                © 2021 Published by Elsevier Inc.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 29 March 2021
                : 3 July 2021
                : 6 July 2021
                Categories
                Article

                General environmental science
                covid-19,coronavirus infections,sars-cov-2,risk assessment,crisis management,country monitoring,pandemic response,preventing transmission,biological security,covid-19 vaccine uptake,vaccination plan,preparedness,public health,healthcare sector,public health capacity,health systems,health systems resilience,population size,governance

                Comments

                Comment on this article